Imagine you invest $100 a month in a certain stock. The stock price dips from $10 to $5, so in two months you have 300 shares. Let's say the price rises back to $10, so those 30 shares are now worth $300. You invested $200.
So you benefited more from buying the thing that went down and recovered, than if you had bought something stable that had stayed the same price and didn't crash.
In these last days of fiat-world there's a bunch of idle chatter. Everyone says not to buy the thing that went down because it lost money so it must be bad. But someone who understands what the company does and knows its value in relation to the rest of the market is able to vastly outperform everyone going along with whatever CNN says.
This creates a troublesome dynamic where an individual who is right is consistently making more money than a multitude who are wrong, leading to extreme wealth inequality.
Fortunately, from the depths of history a solution has emerged, which is to hold your ground and give them nothing.
It is immoral to aid your own destroyers.
First month I made an investment that made break-even, second month I made and investment that doubled. I struggle to see where the problem with this is supposed to be.
No problem for you. Other people have a problem with it sometimes.
Socialism with Chinese characteristics has created more wealth in the last 30 years than the petrodollar and its Zionist war criminal sponsors including POTUS Trump.
USA is nearly outta Interceptors and cannot build anymore because China has all the refined rare earths.
Dang!
Cling on to your Bitcoin for dear life but it may just be a late stage fad in a dying empire.
Suez - Hormuz